Rightwingers, of whom I'm one, let the gay shit go

[Mertex]

Never let the gay shit go right wingers. And continue the war on women's right, the fight against minorities, the fight against science and education, it can only help you in the long run.

You forgot....the war on Catholic popes......

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Actually, it comes down to wanting to encourage an institution that is beneficial for society as a whole. Neither homosexual marriages nor polygamous marriages are beneficial to society, in fact they damage it.

Also, they are not THE SAME as traditional marriage. So why on earth are we compelled to pretend they are? They are different animals...men and women who enter into polygamy and homosexual "marriages" are not being denied anything. They have the perfect right to enter into traditional marriage and be recognized by the government just as anyone else does.

They choose not to. It's a choice. They rejected traditional marriage in favor of a different situation...good for them. But we are not, and should not be, obliged to pretend it's EXACTLY THE SAME. It's not.

There is no such thing as ‘polygamist marriage,’ as no state sanctions bigamy, which is the crime of fraud.

Likewise, there is no such thing as ‘gay marriage,’ as all marriage law is the same. The issue only concerns the states that seek to violate same-sex couples’ equal protection right to marry, as all marriage laws can accommodate either same- or opposite-sex couples. And consequently the benefits to society marriage affords manifest whether the couple is same- or opposite sex.

The marriage of a same-sex couple is indeed exactly the same as the marriage of an opposite-sex couple, as all marriage laws are written to accommodate two equal partners in a recognized legal contract.

 

[Gadawg73]

Mal and his like are exactly the reason why the GOP are losers in elections.
And they could care less about losing because they are losers.
Winners want to win and accepting others where the only difference between them and us is that they fall in love with folks of the same sex will win elections as many gay folks vote and will vote Republican if they are treated as equals under the law.
Mal and his like can not have that as gay folks are an attack on their ego and pseudo "masculinity".
They claim it is about religion.
No one believes you Mal so quit the con. You hate gays so man up and admit it.

Yep... asshole liberals want to win, and will crawl into bed with anybody to do it (hence the reason Joseph Stalin climbed into bed with Adolf Hitler only to have it end as it always does - with the devil turning on you).

Men of integrity stand on principle in the face of all odds. So you keep bending over GADawg to "win" elections. That's really turned out so well for you. The Constitution has been completely shredded. We're $17 trillion in debt. The NSA is spying on you 24x7, collecting 100% of every keystroke, text, phone call, voicemail, etc. Hey, how does that liberal cock feel in your ass? Aren't you glad you climbed into bed with them to "win" elections?

I was voting Republican while you were on your mama's tit. 1st one was in a local election in 1973. Crossed the line many a time for many years in the land where mama's boys talk and the rest of us let our pads do the talking.
If you had a brain you would know how many gay and lesbian interpreters, IT personnel and weapons systems techs were tossed out of the military for what? Tell us, speak a little louder Moe as you are good at it.
No problems to date in the military with open service.
You are the one that keeps talking about cock in the ass. Not me. I am a straight heterosexual male. Take your personal problems to a psychiatrist.

 

[Gadawg73]

I see that a lot with those who compare gays and gay marriage with all those other things.

to be frank, gays don't do themselves any favors when they do shit like prance around half naked in public, or force people to bake cakes and such things .

Two sides of the same asshole.

That would then also imply that Fred Phelps or any KKK rally represents me as they are aligned with my party.

There are morons of all faiths and walks of life. I don't know very many gay people but the ones I do know think that behavior is as bad as I think Phelps' s is.

Two sides indeed.

You and I think alike.

 

[Gadawg73]

Actually, it comes down to wanting to encourage an institution that is beneficial for society as a whole. Neither homosexual marriages nor polygamous marriages are beneficial to society, in fact they damage it.

Also, they are not THE SAME as traditional marriage. So why on earth are we compelled to pretend they are? They are different animals...men and women who enter into polygamy and homosexual "marriages" are not being denied anything. They have the perfect right to enter into traditional marriage and be recognized by the government just as anyone else does.

They choose not to. It's a choice. They rejected traditional marriage in favor of a different situation...good for them. But we are not, and should not be, obliged to pretend it's EXACTLY THE SAME. It's not.

Yeah, real beneficial where the majority of heterosexual marriages end in divorce.
Your claims would make sense if they were true.
But they aren't. Heterosexual marriage statistically is a bad example of what a good marriage should be.
And no one has forced you to do a damn thing.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Pedophilia and gay parades.

It’s no wonder those opposed to equal protection rights for same-sex couples continue to fail in the courts.

 

[P@triot]

Rottweiler every time you call me a liberal you expose yourself as a moronic rightwing loon. Just because we disagree on ONE FUCKING ISSUE doesn't automatically place someone in an opposing political spectrum as you. That kind of thinking is idiotic and narrow minded.

The republican party MUST be larger than that of the scope of your narrow minded attitude.

I NEVER said anyone had to condone anything. I simply said lets stop giving the left this stupid issue to clobber us over the head with.

Gays getting married has 0 impact on any of our lives so lets stop pissing away voters because you deem a behavior morally wrong.

We disagree on "one" thing? Well, we disagree on your first idiotic post about bending over on gay marriage - which started this thread. And we disagree on your last idiotic post in which you state that religion is fraud for "idiots".

So in one thread, I've already found two things we vehemently disagree on and two things which expose you as the asshole RINO that you are. You hate religion and you embrace gay marriage. You're a dream for the idiot liberals on USMB and you align with them perfectly. Even right up to your belief that one should bend their principle and crawl into bed with the devil to "win" at all costs.

Basically, beside being a RINO, you're a panic-stricken coward. You've allowed the idiot libtards on USMB to convince you that the sky is falling because Obama managed to rig one election. If the Republican Party is so "narrow" and needs to bend over to attract more people, how the fuck do you explain how they won 232 elections in the House (can you say majority), won 30 elections out of 50 for state governors (can you say majority), and won a fuck-load more mayorships, city council, county auditors, etc. than the Dumbocrats (can you say majority)?

Jesus, you panic-stricken little bitch of a RINO. The Dumbocrat "tent" is waiting for you. Go bask in the glory of a bunch of derlict parasites. The mysandrist twats will hate you because you're a man. But part of that will because 70% of them will be getting raped in the tent by the distrubed liberal bums (like OWA). The 30% who aren't getting raped will hate you because their husbands/boyfriends humiliate them 24x7 with affairs. But hey, look on the bright side - all of you can celebrate your hate for God together!

 

[P@triot]

How does my legal marriage of five years (to my partner of 18) do any of that Puppy? You're starting to sound unhinged again. Careful.

Watching you get angry because you know I'm right is always amusing...

I asked a simple question. Who the fuck are you to tell someone else they must choose ONE person when you demanded the "right" (which we both know doesn't exist anyway - but I digress) to marry someone of the same sex? If you don't have to recognize one man and one woman, who are you to tell someone else they must recognize a single partner?

Quick, fill the board with snarky responses while you desperately call all of your pals in the gay community looking for some sort of response to this question which exposes you as a hypocrite and pins you in the corner from which you can't escape...

^ Melting down

^ Has come to the harsh realization that she has no intelligent response when faced with the facts...

 

[P@triot]

How does my legal marriage of five years (to my partner of 18) do any of that Puppy? You're starting to sound unhinged again. Careful.

Watching you get angry because you know I'm right is always amusing...

I asked a simple question. Who the fuck are you to tell someone else they must choose ONE person when you demanded the "right" (which we both know doesn't exist anyway - but I digress) to marry someone of the same sex? If you don't have to recognize one man and one woman, who are you to tell someone else they must recognize a single partner?

Quick, fill the board with snarky responses while you desperately call all of your pals in the gay community looking for some sort of response to this question which exposes you as a hypocrite and pins you in the corner from which you can't escape...

Except I'm not the one sounding angry and unhinged, you are.

Good luck with your plural marriage Strawman...er, fight. Polygamy has already lost at the SCOTUS level but you're welcome to keep trying.

Gay marriage also lost at every level for over 100 years. It's only a matter of time until you Dumbocrats appoint the next unqualified, unhinged idiot to the Supreme Court who believes their job is not to uphold the Constitution, but rather to advance the liberal agenda of collapsing society and then collapsing the U.S. (I would say "justice", but you buffoons actually appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and that troll had never been a judge in her life ).

By the way, you sound like an idiot screaming "strawman" in every post like someone with Tourette's. You're a hypocrite. Be a big girl and own it.

 

[P@triot]

LOL @ you talking about anyone making assumptions and then calling me a Democrat. I actually hold public office and have for 12 years and every time I run there's a big R behind my name. although in the future than may be an I, I haven't decided on that yet.

If you TRULY wanted the federal government to stick to its 18 enumerated powers you would absolutely and unequivocally state that the federal government has NOT right to define marriage PERIOD. So that was a um fib on your part.

First of all, about half of the liberals in politics run with a little "R" behind their name. And the fact that you're so Republican, you're considering running as an independent says it all.

And I've stated, oh - I don't know - about 30,000 times now on USMB, that the federal government has zero business involving itself in anything outside of its 18 enumerated powers. So I guess this clearly answer my previous question - you have a serious reading comprehension problem. You were born to run as a Dumbocrat.

 

[Faun]

Hey [MENTION=20112]bodecea[/MENTION] and [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] - just curious if you saw this post? This is a fellow Dumbocrat showing her "tolerance" for someone different from her.

"Flaming fag" - how accepting by this Dumbocrat. But I'm sure you'll attempt to defend this hateful homophobic rhetoric (and probably attempt to demonize conservatives in the process).

I don't know why you keep going on about tolerance from the left.

WHERE do you get the idea that we would be tolerant of YOU?

Apparently you're so ignorant, you can't even comprehend sarcasm. Believe me [MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION], I know you racist, homophobic, anti-Constitutional, useful-idiot Dumbocrat bigots are not tolerant of anything. It's why you throw yourselves on the floor like children when you don't get your way...

Ahh, yes, the rebel flag. Symbol of racism in America. True, it was once the flag of the racist Conservative Democrats. Now it's the flag of the racist Conservative Republicans.

teabagger (and other assorted rightwingnut) gatherings ......

 

[Faun]

And the Republican party has elected just 6 black Republicans since Reconstruction. Currently, of the 43 blacks in Congress, 42 are Democrat and just one is Republican.

Oh, how times have changed, eh, ChoadBreath?

 

[thanatos144]

I don't know why you keep going on about tolerance from the left.

WHERE do you get the idea that we would be tolerant of YOU?

Apparently you're so ignorant, you can't even comprehend sarcasm. Believe me [MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION], I know you racist, homophobic, anti-Constitutional, useful-idiot Dumbocrat bigots are not tolerant of anything. It's why you throw yourselves on the floor like children when you don't get your way...

Ahh, yes, the rebel flag. Symbol of racism in America. True, it was once the flag of the racist Conservative Democrats. Now it's the flag of the racist Conservative Republicans.

teabagger (and other assorted rightwingnut) gatherings ......

They were democrats not conservatives I don't expect a hatemonger like yourself to understand

tapatalk post

 

[sfcalifornia]

Watching you get angry because you know I'm right is always amusing...

I asked a simple question. Who the fuck are you to tell someone else they must choose ONE person when you demanded the "right" (which we both know doesn't exist anyway - but I digress) to marry someone of the same sex? If you don't have to recognize one man and one woman, who are you to tell someone else they must recognize a single partner?

Quick, fill the board with snarky responses while you desperately call all of your pals in the gay community looking for some sort of response to this question which exposes you as a hypocrite and pins you in the corner from which you can't escape...

Except I'm not the one sounding angry and unhinged, you are.

Good luck with your plural marriage Strawman...er, fight. Polygamy has already lost at the SCOTUS level but you're welcome to keep trying.

Gay marriage also lost at every level for over 100 years. It's only a matter of time until you Dumbocrats appoint the next unqualified, unhinged idiot to the Supreme Court who believes their job is not to uphold the Constitution, but rather to advance the liberal agenda of collapsing society and then collapsing the U.S. (I would say "justice", but you buffoons actually appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and that troll had never been a judge in her life ).

By the way, you sound like an idiot screaming "strawman" in every post like someone with Tourette's. You're a hypocrite. Be a big girl and own it.

LOL

Yup!

Rotten's gonna be butthurt over the DOMA and Prop 8 ruling for a long, loooong time!

 

[thanatos144]

Except I'm not the one sounding angry and unhinged, you are.

Good luck with your plural marriage Strawman...er, fight. Polygamy has already lost at the SCOTUS level but you're welcome to keep trying.

Gay marriage also lost at every level for over 100 years. It's only a matter of time until you Dumbocrats appoint the next unqualified, unhinged idiot to the Supreme Court who believes their job is not to uphold the Constitution, but rather to advance the liberal agenda of collapsing society and then collapsing the U.S. (I would say "justice", but you buffoons actually appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and that troll had never been a judge in her life ).

By the way, you sound like an idiot screaming "strawman" in every post like someone with Tourette's. You're a hypocrite. Be a big girl and own it.

LOL

Yup!

Rotten's gonna be butthurt over the DOMA and Prop 8 ruling for a long, loooong time!

You need to read the ruling because it doesn't say what you think it does

tapatalk post

 

[Faun]

You're lack of reading comprehension is painfully obvious...

First of all, the U.S. Constitution is the highest law in the land. If the law was "open to interpretation" it would be impossible to obey as each person would "interpret" it differently. You've already admitted, cum-guzzler, that lower laws like the speed limit, rape, and murder are not open to "interpretation" - yet you're so ignorant you want to make the argument that higher laws are?

Second, another illustration of your lack of reading comprehension is that I specifically addressed Bodecea and SeaWytch in my challenge. I did not offer the challenge to the entire board. So even if someone had actually provided you with information that made you correct for the first time in your miserable life as parasite-draining burden on the U.S., I still would not be required to leave USMB to keep my word, cum-guzzler.

Holyfuckingshit!!

So your out is that your offer [on a public forum] was only to select participants???

Obviously cum-guzzler Fauny fancies himself a lady. It's also obvious why she can't understand the Constitution since she can't understand a simple post on USMB. You must really love my dick Fauny, because you go out of your way to have me bend you over in front of everyone on USMB every day

Why don't you just get the words, "flaming fag," tattooed across your forehead, since you like advertising that so much?

Yeah.... I don't need an "out" since I literally bent you over and made you my bitch on USMB (something you apparently like being a cum-guzzler who keeps coming back for more ). I was right. You were wrong. I've proven that about a dozen times now. Why could you not highlight the section in blue as requested? Because you were wrong. Why do you leave out previous parts of your posts after I respond with facts that expose your ignorance? Because you were wrong. Why do you have no response for the fact that you don't believe lower laws (such as speed limits) are not "open to interpretation" while ignorantly claiming that the highest law in the land is "open to interpretation"? Because you were wrong. Why do you have no response for the fact that a law which is "open to interpretation" cannot be obeyed - and hence the reason a law has never, and will never, be "open to interpretation"? Because you were wrong.

I don't know why you insist on parading your flaming faggotry on this forum, but your swishiness aside, I need not highlight the text in blue which I had already highlighted. If you don't understand it in black bold, you're certainly not going to understand it in blue bold.

As for your idiocy about laws not being open to interpretation -- this is yet another shining example of just how retarded you are.

Of course judges can (and do) interpret the law.

It's called, "precedent," you steaming pile of jism filled pus.

Fauny, sweetie, I have literally given you the most comprehensive beat down here in USMB history. This post here is yet another beat down - you can't provide a reasonable, intelligent response to even one of the questions in the paragraph above. I didn't need an "out" - I was right all along. I merely posted the fact that I specifically made that challenge to BD & SW simply to humiliate you further by illustrating just how severe your lack of reading comprehension is (which explains why you're incapable of understanding the Constitution).

It's cute how you get the shit kicked out of you and then wave your pom poms as if you didn't.

You were shown where the Constitution grants the power to the Supreme Court (and given a case example) to rule on the Constitution itself, yet you refuse to be a man of your word and leave, as you said you would.

Now you're being the forum pussy, looking for an out by acting as if only certain people were allowed to prove what a dumbfucking rightard you are.



Now begone, Pussy!

 

[Faun]

Apparently you're so ignorant, you can't even comprehend sarcasm. Believe me [MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION], I know you racist, homophobic, anti-Constitutional, useful-idiot Dumbocrat bigots are not tolerant of anything. It's why you throw yourselves on the floor like children when you don't get your way...

Ahh, yes, the rebel flag. Symbol of racism in America. True, it was once the flag of the racist Conservative Democrats. Now it's the flag of the racist Conservative Republicans.

teabagger (and other assorted rightwingnut) gatherings ......

They were democrats not conservatives I don't expect a hatemonger like yourself to understand

tapatalk post

Sure, uh-huh. And the 42 black Democrats out of 43 blacks in Congress are really Republicans.

Oh, and the flag hanging at the tea party, not being held by anyone, was really planted there by a covert Democrat.

 

[thanatos144]

Ahh, yes, the rebel flag. Symbol of racism in America. True, it was once the flag of the racist Conservative Democrats. Now it's the flag of the racist Conservative Republicans.

teabagger (and other assorted rightwingnut) gatherings ......

They were democrats not conservatives I don't expect a hatemonger like yourself to understand

tapatalk post

Sure, uh-huh. And the 42 black Democrats out of 43 blacks in Congress are really Republicans.

Oh, and the flag hanging at the tea party, not being held by anyone, was really planted there by a covert Democrat.

Do you think blacks can't be racist?

tapatalk post

 

[Faun]

They were democrats not conservatives I don't expect a hatemonger like yourself to understand

tapatalk post

Sure, uh-huh. And the 42 black Democrats out of 43 blacks in Congress are really Republicans.

Oh, and the flag hanging at the tea party, not being held by anyone, was really planted there by a covert Democrat.

Do you think blacks can't be racist?

tapatalk post

And there it is -- the white flag of diversion.

 

[P@triot]

You were shown where the Constitution grants the power to the Supreme Court (and given a case example) to rule on the Constitution itself, yet you refuse to be a man of your word and leave, as you said you would.

Now you're being the forum pussy, looking for an out by acting as if only certain people were allowed to prove what a dumbfucking rightard you are.



Now begone, Pussy!

One problem my little cum-guzzler - what you posted proved I was right (and proved you're an idiot with a serious reading comprehension problem). I then further proved you're reading comprehension problem by posting my original quote, along with the post number, the page number, and the link to it.

You've been whipped in so many ways (and that's why you're desperate for me to leave - because I've humiliated you with facts).

Another question you can't answer - how can a law be obeyed if it is "open to interpretation"? The fact that you can't answer this is glaring evidence that you are wrong (and my personal bitch on USMB).